In August of 1962 the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) authorized a secret radioactive tracer experiment near a small creek on the northwest coast of Alaska. The experiment contaminated the surrounding area with radioactive materials, a fact that the AEC kept from the people in the local communities. The nearby community of Point Hope experienced an alarming increase in the rate of cancer beginning approximately 20 years after the contamination. Public health agencies, in response to concerns from community members, conducted three epidemiological studies in the 1980's. Although the studies did not find the local cancer rates significant, Point Hopers doubted these conclusions. Local `tales` had long focused on the possible relationship between cancer in the village and buried poisons left by scientists. While the `discovery` of the contamination in 1992 seemed to vindicate the claims of Point Hopers, official scientific explanations dismissed the possible link between the contamination and cancer. The proposed dissertation study investigates the scientific claims made about health risks in Point Hope. It does this by focusing on what scientists said and how they said it. The analysis will proceed by ironically juxtaposing realist and anti-realist deconstructive strategies to investigate 1) how well the scientific claims made about the contamination in Point Hope meet with standard practices of scientific inquiry, and 2) the rhetorical strategies scientists used in claims-makings about the contamination in Point Hope.
